Opinion: Warren makes Democrats antsy. Sanders should petrify them.

Jennifer Rubin

Tuesday

Mar 5, 2019 at 2:35 PM

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., is fully in tune with the progressive wing of her party, has a boatload of detailed policy ideas and high name recognition. She seems to be working hard in early primary states, giving voters plenty of access. And yet, it haunts her. The Native American thing, of course.

She has slipped dramatically in polls since last year, and hasn't matched others in small-donor fundraising, one indication of enthusiasm. And the Native American story just won't go away. During this interview with CNN's David Axelrod, Warren explains why she listed her ethnicity on her bar application:

The most telling part of that interview was her response when asked whether it was a mistake to release a video and give new life to President Donald Trump's nasty "Pocahontas" taunt. "I can't go back," she says. But did she learn from it? And herein lies the ongoing issue: Warren insists Trump is going to be Trump, and that she's just got to move forward.

On one level, it is true that Democrats cannot react to everything Trump says. But she made Trump the alpha dog in that fight by conducting the DNA test and releasing the video. She put him in control. Moreover, the notion that Warren is just going to let Trump's barbs slide off of her raises the question: Does she really know how to fight back? Could Trump put her back on her heels from day one of the general election?

Sure, Democrats' sensitivity about racial and ethnic identity may play a part in concern about her candidacy. That doesn't really get to the nub of the problem, however. Likewise, most Democrats seem to accept her assertion that she never got a job because of her claim to have Native American ancestry. So what's the problem?

The problem for her is the nagging sense among Democrats that Trump has already gotten the better of her - and their conviction that their party's nominee cannot start out already playing defense. Her problem isn't that she seems dishonest, it's that she seems politically feckless. And in an election where winning is everything, that's worse.

Democrats are right to be concerned about their nominee's political chops, but they should be more concerned with a candidate's boasting about a socialist pedigree than one claiming to have Native American ancestry. The latter is politically dumb, the former raises questions ranging from electability to capacity for governance to possessing a unifying vision.

If Democratic are nervous Trump will skewer Warren over her ancestry, they should be petrified about what Trump is going to do with the socialist affiliation of Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. It will frighten voters and transform the election from a referendum on Trump to one on socialism. The future for them, Trump already insists, would be Venezuela.

Sure, it's ridiculous to claim that socialism is best exemplified by Nicolás Maduro's Venezuela (Why not Norway?), but it sure doesn't help when Sanders refuses to condemn Maduro outright.

Moreover, it's not as though Sanders has ever gotten consensus for and passed his self-described socialist ideas. Other candidates can claim victories in passage of green-energy legislation and support for state compacts to adhere to the Paris Agreement, both of which address the problem of climate change. The Green New Deal hasn't been implemented because, in its idealized version, it lacks substantial political support and won't pass.

Likewise, Democratic governors can claim progress in extending Medicaid coverage or reforming fee-for-service payment in their states. Former Colorado governor John Hickenlooper went to bat to fight to save the Affordable Care Act; Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., has been front and center working on reducing the cost of prescription drugs. But Medicare-for-all? It has never come close to passing, partly because voters have no desire to give up employer-provided insurance.

Part of vision is the ability to set out an agenda that is attainable and attractive for an electoral majority. A vision so extreme that it loses half the voters coming out the gate isn't what primary voters should crave.

In short, Democratic voters definitely should be concerned about giving Trump the political upper hand. The worst thing they can do, far worse than nominating a political neophyte, is to nominate someone with an agenda easily portrayed as scary. If the candidate has no track record of success for measures precisely because they are far outon the left-wing of an already progressive party, primary voters should run the other way. If Democrats want to win, they better find a candidate who can remind voters Trump is the scary one with policies (e.g., repealing Obamacare, tax cuts for the rich) ordinary voters hate.

Jennifer Rubin writes reported opinion for The Washington Post.

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.